Mohit Deora Vs Union of India through Directorate of Enforcement (Jharkhand High Court)
Jharkhand High Court held that bail application in the case of fake firms for passing on ineligible ITC by issuing fake GST bills not granted since twin conditions of Section 45 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA] not fulfilled.
Facts- The instant application has been filed under Sections 483 and 484 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying for grant of bail in connection with ECIR Case No. 05 of 2025 arising out of ECIR/RZNO/18/2024 dated 23.09.2024 for the offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, based on the Complaint Case Nos.678 of 2024, 1280 of 2024 and 1281 of 2024 before the learned Court of Economic Offences, Jamshedpur under section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Sections 20 of the IGST, read with Sections 34, , 193, 195A, 201, 203, 204, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
Conclusion- Held that taking into consideration the grave nature of the allegations, the sophisticated modus operandi employed to project tainted property as untainted, and the strict statutory framework governing bail under the PML Act, 2002, it is considered view of this Court that no ground exists for the petitioner to claim the benefit of bail on merits. The gravity of the offence, and the serious allegations of facilitating the laundering of proceeds of crime continue to justify the petitioner’s custody under the strict rigors of Section 45 of the Act 2002.
